Background: Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (AE-IPF) is a severe complication associated with a high mortality. However, evidence and guidance on management is sparse. The aim of this international survey was to assess differences in prevention, diagnostic and treatment strategies for AE-IPF in specialised and non-specialised ILD centres worldwide. Material and Methods: Pulmonologists working in specialised and non-specialised ILD centres were invited to participate in a survey designed by an international expert panel. Responses were evaluated in respect to the physicians institutions. Results: Three hundred and two (65%) of the respondents worked in a specialised ILD centre, 134 (29%) in a non-specialised pulmonology centre. Similarities were frequent with regards to diagnostic methods including radiology and screening for infection, treatment with corticosteroids, use of high-flow oxygen and non-invasive ventilation in critical ill patients and palliative strategies. However, differences were significant in terms of the use of KL-6 and pathogen testing in urine, treatments with cyclosporine and recombinant thrombomodulin, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in critical ill patients as well as antacid medication and anaesthesia measures as preventive methods. Conclusion: Despite the absence of recommendations, approaches to the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of AE-IPF are comparable in specialised and non-specialised ILD centres, yet certain differences in the managements of AE-IPF exist. Clinical trials and guidelines are needed to improve patient care and prognosis in AE-IPF.

Background

Interstitial lung abnormalities (ILA) may represent undiagnosed early-stage or subclinical interstitial lung disease (ILD). ILA are often observed incidentally in patients who subsequently develop clinically overt ILD. There is limited information on consensus definitions for, and the appropriate evaluation of, ILA. Early recognition of patients with ILD remains challenging, yet critically important. Expert consensus could inform early recognition and referral.

Research question

Can consensus-based expert recommendations be identified to guide clinicians in the recognition, referral, and follow-up of patients with or at risk of developing early ILDs?

Study design and methods

Pulmonologists and radiologists with expertise in ILD participated in two iterative rounds of surveys. The surveys aimed to establish consensus regarding ILA reporting, identification of patients with ILA, and identification of populations that might benefit from screening for ILD. Recommended referral criteria and follow-up processes were also addressed. Threshold for consensus was defined a priori as ≥ 75% agreement or disagreement.

Results

Fifty-five experts were invited and 44 participated; consensus was reached on 39 of 85 questions. The following clinically important statements achieved consensus: honeycombing and traction bronchiectasis or bronchiolectasis indicate potentially progressive ILD; honeycombing detected during lung cancer screening should be reported as potentially significant (eg, with the Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System "S-modifier" [Lung-RADS; which indicates clinically significant or potentially significant noncancer findings]), recommending referral to a pulmonologist in the radiology report; high-resolution CT imaging and full pulmonary function tests should be ordered if nondependent subpleural reticulation, traction bronchiectasis, honeycombing, centrilobular ground-glass nodules, or patchy ground-glass opacity are observed on CT imaging; patients with honeycombing or traction bronchiectasis should be referred to a pulmonologist irrespective of diffusion capacity values; and patients with systemic sclerosis should be screened with pulmonary function tests for early-stage ILD.

Interpretation

Guidance was established for identifying clinically relevant ILA, subsequent referral, and follow-up. These results lay the foundation for developing practical guidance on managing patients with ILA.